Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 73 (2017) 1231–1246

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/rser

Analysis of the long-term solar potential for electricity generation in Qatar MARK
a,⁎ b c a a
Luis Martín-Pomares , Diego Martínez , Jesús Polo , Daniel Perez-Astudillo , Dunia Bachour ,
Antonio Sanfilippoa
a
Qatar Environment & Energy Research Institute, Hamad Bin Khalifa University, P.O. Box 5825, Doha, Qatar
b
Plataforma Solar de Almería-CIEMAT, Ctra. de Senés s/n, 04200 Tabernas, Almería, Spain
c
Photovoltaic Solar Energy Unit, Renewable Energy Division, CIEMAT, Spain

A R T I C L E I N F O A BS T RAC T

Keywords: This paper presents and analyzes Qatar's long-term solar resource potential to assess the power generation
Solar radiation mapping prospects of diverse solar plants in the country. Solar resource potential is obtained by applying kriging
CSP potential techniques to satellite-derived data to produce maps of monthly and yearly averages of global horizontal and
PV potential direct normal irradiation. This analysis is based on eleven years of hourly satellite-derived solar radiation data
Solar energy production simulation
calculated through a modified version of the Heliosat-3 model, where the satellite estimations have been
Long-term solar radiation
Qatar solar energy
improved and adapted to site using bias removal methods through a comparison with ground radiometric
measurements. Solar resource data are then used in combination with local meteorological data as input to the
System Advisor Model (SAM) in TMY3 format to simulate the solar plant operational prospects of various
concentrating solar systems (CSP) and photovoltaic (PV) reference plants over eleven years. The ensuing
simulation results show that parabolic troughs, molten salt tower plant with large thermal storage systems, and
large grid-connected PV systems offer the best solutions in terms of interannual variability and long-term
stability of the electricity produced.

1. Introduction
The deployment of solar energy systems has shown an impressive
growth worldwide in recent years. Photovoltaic technology (PV) has
prevailed as the preferred solution across the board, while the uptake of
concentrating solar systems (CSP) has been limited in geographical
scope due to their higher insolation requirements. Nevertheless, CSP
adoption is expected to continue to rise in areas which benefit from
high levels of long-term yearly direct normal irradiance (DNI), such as
Northwest India, the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) region,
Chile, Australia, Namibia and South Africa (http://www.solarpaces.
org/). MENA countries have abundant solar resources, and have
started to make concrete adoption plans for renewable energy due to
rising energy demand from population growth and increased industrial
development [1,2]. The need to reduce carbon emissions, promote
ubiquity, and lower maintenance costs in the production of freshwater
have also contributed to increase interest in the use of CSP for seawater
desalination [12–14]. Consequently, several studies on solar resource
assessment and feasibility for PV and CSP power plants have recently
been carried out in the region [3–11].
The first step in establishing the solar energy potential for the
deployment of solar power plants is to perform an accurate assessment
of the solar resources in the long term. The information and literature
on models for solar radiation estimation is extensive. A thorough
review of empirical models for diffuse and global radiation is provided
in [15] and [16]. Artificial intelligence techniques (neural networks,
genetic algorithm, artificial neuro-fuzzy inference systems and support
vector machine) have also been recently used for modeling and
forecasting solar radiation [17–19]. However, it is recognized that
satellite-derived models provide more reliable estimations for long-
term hourly and sub-hourly time series of solar irradiance components,
mainly GHI (Global Horizontal Irradiance) and DNI (Direct Normal
Irradiance) [20,21]. Moreover, recent studies show that reanalysis-
based irradiance data can also be useful when satellite-derived
irradiance is not available [22].
Satellite-derived data can also help map solar potential to support
decision-making processes for solar system deployment [23]. However,
such a practice requires that satellite-derived solar radiation data be
post-processed to reduce biases, eliminate systematic errors, and
estimate data uncertainty through comparison with ground measure-
ments aimed at adapting the data to the local effects (“site adaptation”)
[24]. In this regards, the integration of information derived from
satellite and geographic information systems (GIS) to map solar
resources provides the basis for planning and designing a country's

⁎
Corresponding author.
E-mail address: lpomares@hbku.edu.qa (L. Martín-Pomares).

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2017.01.125
Received 4 March 2016; Received in revised form 28 December 2016; Accepted 19 January 2017
Available online 16 February 2017
1364-0321/ © 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
L. Martín-Pomares et al. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 73 (2017) 1231–1246

Nomenclature NCEP National Centers for Environmental Prediction

P90 Percentile 90 of the yearly distribution
AC Alternating Current P95 Percentile 95 of the yearly distribution
AOD Aerosol Optical Depth PSA Plataforma Solar de Almería
BSRN Baseline Surface Radiation Network PV Photovoltaic
CDF Cumulative Distribution Function QEERI Qatar Environmental and Energy Research Institute
CIEMAT Centro de Investigaciones Energéticas Medioambientales QMD Qatar Meteorological Department
y Tecnológicas REST2 High-performance solar radiation model for cloudless-sky
CSP Concentrated Solar Power or Concentrated Solar System irradiance, illuminance, and photosynthetically active
DHI Diffuse Horizontal Irradiance radiation
DNI Direct Normal Irradiance rMBD Relative Mean Bias Deviation
FIFA Federation Internationale de Football Association RMSD Root Mean Square Deviation
GHI Global Horizontal Irradiance rRMSD Relative Root Mean Square Deviation
GIS Geographic Information System SAM System Advisor Model
HTF Heat Transfer Fluid SHC Solar Heating and Cooling
IEA International Energy Agency TMY3 Typical Meteorological Year version 3
IODC Indian Ocean Data Coverage U Combined uncertainty
ISO International Organization for Standarization Uinput The annual uncertainty of satellite-derived
KS Kolmogorov-Smirnov test USAM The uncertainty of the SAM model
KSI Kolmogorov-Smirnov test Integral Yexp Measured values of the random variable
MACC Monitoring Atmospheric Composition & Climate Ymod Estimated values of the random variable
MBD Mean Bias Deviation σint Inter-annual variability
MENA The Middle East and North Africa region µ Mean value
NCAR National Center for Atmospheric Research

solar energy deployment [3,25–30]. ciated uncertainties. This analysis helps establish the solar potential for
Qatar's climate can be described as subtropical dry, hot desert electricity generation in Qatar, and can support the design and
climate (“BWh” according to the Köppen-Geiger classification), with decision-making process for solar energy systems in the country.
low annual rainfall, very high temperatures in summer, and dramatic
temperature changes [32,33]. The nation enjoys a high level of 2. Solar resource assessment
insolation due to its geographical location in the subtropical ridge, an
area of atmospheric high pressure, and is therefore well-poised to This section presents the methodology used for assessing and
benefit from the use of solar energy to generate electricity. Plans are validating solar resources in Qatar, and the resulting datasets. Solar
underway to produce 2% of the national electricity production from radiation estimates have been performed by combining hourly satellite-
solar power systems by 2020, and 20% by 2030 [31]. derived information with the available ground radiometric measure-
Solar energy potential has been analyzed for several Middle East ments.
countries [3,4,13,14,34–36]. The first study on the measurement and
prediction of global solar radiation in Doha (Qatar) dates back to 1985
2.1. Ground measurements
[37]. Later in the 90s, [38] investigated the availability of solar energy
in Qatar. A more recent analysis of ground measurements of GHI in
Global solar horizontal irradiance (GHI) has been measured in
Doha is given in [39], for the period 2008–2012. Also, [40] provides
twelve ground stations throughout Qatar since 2007 by the Qatar
maps of the annual global radiation over Qatar, based on ground
Meteorological Department (QMD) [42], using Kipp & Zonen pyran-
measurements. A recent study on ideal solar-wind farm locations based
ometers of type CM6B, compliant with all ISO-9060 specification
on RETScreen41 and GIS analysis performed for the Middle-East
criteria of an ISO First Class pyranometer. Daily values from these
identifies Qatar as a promising site for renewable energy applications
stations have been used in this study.
[41]. However, there are no specific previous studies focused on the
GHI, DNI and DHI (Diffuse Horizontal Irradiance) components
long-term characterization of solar resource and solar energy potential
have been recorded since the end of November 2012 through a
in Qatar.
radiometric station operated by the Qatar Environment and Energy
This work presents an analysis of the solar power potential in Qatar
Research Institute (QEERI) in Education City, Doha, Qatar [43] (see
with specific reference to solar power plants for electricity production.
Fig. 1). The instruments used in this station are high precision and
In the analysis provided, the mapping of solar radiation components is
conform to BSRN standards (Baseline Surface Radiation Network,
calculated from long-term hourly satellite-derived data over a period of
http://bsrn.awi.de). The station consists of one CHP1 pyrheliometer
eleven years. Solar radiation data estimated from satellite images have
for measuring DNI and two CMP11 pyranometers (one shaded) to
been corrected using short-term solar ground measurements. The
measure GHI and DHI. These instruments are mounted on a Solys2
ensuing site-adapted satellite data have been used to generate long-
sun tracker with sun sensor kit for improved tracking accuracy and
term time series of solar irradiance. These time series data enable the
shading ball assembly for diffuse measurements. The station is
modeling of PV and CSP production for several reference plants built
maintained on a daily basis, by cleaning all the sensors and checking
on commonly adopted technologies, such as monocrystalline PV,
the alignment and levelling of the instruments, tracking and shadow
parabolic trough, solar tower and Fresnel systems. The emerging
ball. Data are sampled every second and collected as one-minute
models provide a long-term analysis of both solar resource and energy
averages, in W/m2. For this study, two types of quality filters have
produced by the different power plant scenarios, including the asso-
been applied to the data measured. The quality check filters applied
here are based on the BSRN recommendations and consist of checking
1
Clean Energy Management Software system for energy efficiency from Natural the physical limits, the extremely rare limits and the consistency across
Resources Canada. DNI, DHI and GHI. The second group of filters is more restrictive and

1232
L. Martín-Pomares et al. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 73 (2017) 1231–1246

is based on the relationship between DHI and GHI components for

overcast and clear sky conditions [44].
Ambient temperature (T) and relative humidity (RH) at 2 m have
also been measured at QMD and QEERI stations. Fig. 2 shows the
average long-term monthly ambient temperature (squares) and relative
humidity (circles) at 2 m for the period 1990–2013 in Doha from
QMD. The figure shows that the relative humidity is lower during
summer. Temperature is less variable, but differences of about 4 °C can
be seen from May to July when RH also shows larger differences. RH
and temperature exhibit an inverse behaviour.
Table 1 lists the stations used for this assessment study and their
geographic coordinates, alongside yearly averages of GHI for the
available timespan. In the case of the Doha station, where measure-
ments of the three solar radiation components were available, the
yearly averages of DNI and DHI were 1985 kWh/m2 and 794 kWh/m2,
respectively.

2.2. Satellite-derived data

Satellite imagery of Meteosat IODC (Indian Ocean Data Coverage)

for the period 2003–2013 has been used to compute hourly values of
GHI and DNI for all of Qatar. The satellite images window covers a
geographical area located between latitude 24°–26.95°N and longitude
50°–51.95°E, with a spatial resolution of 0.05°×0.05° degrees. The
methodology used to calculate solar irradiance from satellite images is
detailed in [30,45–47]. Solar irradiance under cloudless conditions was
estimated using the REST2 transmittance model [48]. The aerosol
optical depth (AOD) at 550 nm needed as input to the REST2 model
was obtained from daily values of MACC2 retrievals. The daily
precipitable water column was obtained from NCEP/NCAR.3 Solar
ground measurements were used to improve satellite data estimations
relative to the same areas covered by the solar ground stations,
according to the methodology mentioned above, before processing
the corresponding maps. The corrections were calculated for the
locations of QMD and QEERI stations and applied to the whole
geographic grid under analysis. In the case of GHI measurements in
the QMD and QEERI stations, data corrections were applied daily. For
DNI in the QEERI station, corrections were applied to hourly averages
to produce monthly and yearly maps.
2.3. Uncertainty analysis
The uncertainty of satellite estimations were calculated against
ground measurements through two uncertainty parameters that are
frequently used in the solar resource community, one focused on data
dispersion, and the other based on data frequency distribution [49].
The dispersion parameter was calculated using relativized versions
of the mean bias deviation (rMBD) and root mean square deviation
(rRMSD), as shown in Eqs. (1) and (2), where Yexp and Ymod are the
measured and estimated values of the random variable, respectively,
and N is the total number of points.
Fig. 1. QEERI radiometric station in Education City, Doha (Qatar).
the similarity between the CDF of the solar ground measurement data
(the reference distribution) and the CDF of the satellite-estimated data
[50]. More specifically, this study makes use of the KS Integral
parameter (KSI), as detailed in [49,51], to calculate the differences
between the two datasets numerically.
Table 2 summarizes the uncertainty parameters for the daily
satellite-derived values of GHI at the different QMD ground stations.
The relative rRMSD was around 10% in all the sites, and a positive bias
was observed, indicating a general trend to underestimate the daily
irradiation. A high correlation coefficient (R2 around 0.9) was also
found in daily values of GHI for QMD stations.
Table 3 shows the uncertainty parameters for the raw hourly
satellite-derived values of GHI, DNI and DHI at the QEERI station.
The rRMSD for GHI was 15%. When compared to ground measure-
ments, satellite estimations overestimate DNI and underestimate DHI.
This effect is probably due to the lower load of aerosols and water
vapour registered in the satellite-derived data through the MACC
80
Ambient Temperature at 2 meters
Relative Humidity at 2 meters
70
60
T (°C), RH (%)

N
1 (Yexp − Ymod ) 50
rMBD=100 ∑
N i =1
Yexp (1)
40
N
1 1
rRMSD=100 ∑ (Yexp − Ymod )2
Yexp N i =1 (2) 30

The data distribution uncertainty parameter was based on the

analysis of the cumulative distribution function (CDF) derived from the 20
Kolmogorov-Smirnov (KS) test, which in the present analysis quantifies
10
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
2
Monitoring Atmospheric Composition & Climate, https://www.gmes-atmosphere. Months
eu/.
3
National Centers for Environmental Prediction/National Center for Atmospheric Fig. 2. Average long-term monthly ambient temperature (squares) and relative humidity
Research, http://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/. (circles) at 2 m for the period 1990–2013 in Doha from QMD.

1233
L. Martín-Pomares et al. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 73 (2017) 1231–1246

Table 1
List of stations with coordinates and yearly GHI measured.

# Name of station Network Latitude Longitude (°) Altitude Yearly GHI

( °) (m) (kWh m−2)

1 Doha QEERI 25.33 51.43 10 2146

2 Dukhan QMD 25.40 51.21 3 1966
3 Turayna QMD 24.72 50.96 43 2233
4 AlShehaimiya QMD 25.85 51.56 3 2156
5 Ummsaid QMD 24.94 51.47 9 2042
6 Qatar University QMD 25.38 51.51 24 2071
7 AlKhor QMD 25.62 50.82 4 2131
8 AlKaranaah QMD 24.74 51.61 5 1997
9 AbuSamra QMD 25.19 51.61 5 2086
10 AlWakrah QMD 25.19 51.62 5 2086

Table 2
Uncertainty parameters for the assessment of satellite-derived daily GHI.

Station MBD RMSD KSI rMBD rRMSD KSI R2

(W h m−2 day) (W h −2 day) (%) (%) (%)

Dukhan 449.43 776.12 431.62 7.97 13.77 123.36 0.92

Turayna 63.96 601.34 17.88 1.09 10.21 5.11 0.92
AlShehaimiya 10.60 481.65 68.84 0.18 7.96 19.68 0.96
Ummsaid 235.28 708.94 336.36 4.12 12.41 96.13 0.91
Qatar University 204.33 595.18 269.30 3.50 10.20 76.97 0.94
AlKhor 95.75 697.08 195.80 1.62 11.80 55.96 0.91
AlKaranaah 238.81 690.89 283.94 4.06 11.75 81.15 0.91
AbuSamra 169.88 745.44 155.11 2.91 12.78 44.33 0.88
AlWakrah 126.68 727.61 132.80 2.17 12.48 37.96 0.89
TOTAL 177.19 669.36 210.18 3.07 11.48 60.07 0.92

model, which has a coarse spatial resolution of 125 km, as compared to 2.4. Site adaptation
ground measurements. The source of a higher load of aerosols in Doha
city is due to its coastal position and anthropogenic factors related to Satellite-based methods for deriving solar radiation components
transportation and construction. may exhibit systematic errors due to an overall overestimation or
underestimation trend (bias), which can be characterized by the mean
bias deviation (MBD). Such errors can be corrected through “site
adaptation” methods that use reference to high quality ground
Table 3 measurements to compute adjustment factors for the satellite-derived
Uncertainty parameters of raw and site-adapted hourly satellite estimations for the data for overlapping time intervals [52–55]. In this study, the hourly
geographical area corresponding to the QEERI station in Doha.
estimations of GHI, DNI and DHI from satellite images have been
Component MBD RMSD KSI rMBD rRMSD KSI adjusted by removing the bias according to linear correction techniques
(W m−2) (W m−2) (%) (%) (%) [56]. Linear correction techniques were applied to the hourly datasets
to derive a correction factor for the satellite-derived dataset in the
Raw GHI 6.67 72.76 19.12 1.38 15.03 64.57
relevant geographical window. Table 3 shows the comparison of the
Raw DNI 18.75 174.18 42.28 4.08 37.90 139.31
Raw DHI −8.32 68.45 16.36 −4.43 36.41 55.16 uncertainty for the raw and site-adapted satellite estimations for hourly
Corrected GHI 0.00 61.73 9.60 0.00 12.75 32.43 GHI, DNI and DHI relative to the area corresponding to the QEERI
Corrected DNI 0.00 148.09 32.57 0.00 32.23 107.33 station in Doha. The rRMSD and KSI results in Table 3 show that the
Corrected DHI 0.00 64.12 8.25 0.00 34.11 27.81
hourly GHI, DNI, DHI satellite data were noticeably improved by
lowering uncertainty though linear correction. Table 4 shows yearly
Table 4
GHI, DNI, DHI values for the improved satellite data for the QEERI
Yearly values for corrected satellite-derived data in Doha (Qatar). station.

Year GHI DNI DHI

(kWh m−2) (kWh m−2) (kWh m−2) 2.5. Maps of GHI and DNI in Qatar
2003 2194 1892 905
2004 2201 1940 867 The methodology for estimating solar radiation from Meteosat
2005 2199 1936 878 satellite images has been implemented to generate hourly values of
2006 2157 1809 910 GHI and DNI, over eleven years, with a spatial resolution of 0.05°
2007 2189 1886 904
2008 2203 1895 913
degrees. Satellite estimations were corrected using the linear bias
2009 2174 1822 919 removal method calculated from the comparison with QEERI and
2010 2173 1869 911 QMD stations for hourly DNI and daily GHI ground measurements.
2011 2112 1733 922 The final site adapted data have been processed to aggregate daily
2012 2118 1764 929
values of GHI and DNI for all of Qatar during the period 2003–
2013 2075 1860 814
MEAN 2163 1855 897 2013. The corrected daily and hourly values have been used to
generate monthly and yearly GHI and DNI maps. The resulting

1234
L. Martín-Pomares et al.
Fig. 3. GHI yearly average (2003–2013) in Qatar (kWh m−2 year−1).
satellite images covered a geographical area extending between
latitude 24–26.95°N and longitude 50–51.95°E. Finally, long-term
yearly values and monthly means of GHI and DNI have been
compiled in raster formats. A kriging technique has been applied
to generate interpolated maps from the raw spatial resolution of the
satellite-derived data. Additional information needed, such as
cartographic shapefiles for borders, administrative regions, and
cities has been obtained from the DIVA GIS spatial data server
(http://www.diva-gis.org/Data). Figs. 3 and 4 show the maps of
average values for the annual sums of daily GHI and DNI, denoted
as yearly average irradiation. Figs. 5 and 6 show the monthly means
of GHI and DNI. According to the maps, GHI is distributed more
homogeneously along the country, while monthly and yearly DNI
exhibits higher spatial variability, as a consequence of the high
aerosol loads which has different seasonal behaviours in terms of
spatial distribution [57].
3. Plant reference scenarios
To estimate CSP and PV potentials in Qatar, different reference
solar power plants have been selected which feature the most widely
adopted technologies. In the analysis of CSP potential, the technologies
1235
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 73 (2017) 1231–1246
of focus are: parabolic trough with and without thermal storage, solar
tower with molten salt, solar tower with direct steam and linear
Fresnel. For the analysis of PV potential, the flat-plate large PV grid-
connected system was selected.
Given the specific focus on solar power potential for electricity
production, specific problems related to the operation and functioning
of the solar energy are outside the scope of this study. Suffice to say,
that the extreme weather conditions that characterize Qatar's climate
[58] don’t constitute a serious problem, as demonstrated by the
successful operation of several solar power plants in the region, such
as the Shams CSP, a 100 MW parabolic trough installed near Madinat
Zayed, Abu Dhabi, the United Arab Emirates.
3.1. Reference plants for CSP
The reference scenarios selected for the potential analysis in CSP
include parabolic trough, central receiver and linear Fresnel technol-
ogies. The selection of the reference plants was performed according to
CSP deployments in Spain [59,60]. Table 5 summarizes the main
characteristics of each plant. For the parabolic trough technology, the
ANDASOL plant [61] was selected as reference, with a gross electricity
output of 50 MWe and the option of 7.5 h of thermal storage system
L. Martín-Pomares et al.
Fig. 4. DNI yearly average (2003–2013) in Qatar (kWh m−2 year−1).
has been selected as a reference [61]. In the case of solar tower
technologies, two different plants were chosen as reference: a solar
tower plant of 19 MWe with molten salt as heat transfer fluid (HTF)
and large thermal storage system like the GEMASOLAR plant [62], and
a central receiver plant of 126 MWe with water/steam as heat transfer
fluid without thermal storage like the Ivanpah 1 plant (http://www.
brightsourceenergy.com/). Finally, for linear Fresnel technology, the
30 MWe Puerto Errado 2 plant in Spain (http://www.novatecsolar.
com/56-1-PE-2.html) was selected [63].
3.2. Reference plants for PV
The reference scenario for PV is a flat plate large plant of 50 MWe of
thin-film CdTe modules. The configuration of the plant consists of
around 58.000 strings in parallel, with 11 CdTe modules per string.
The orientation of the plant was 180° in azimuth (i.e. south oriented)
with a tilt angle corresponding to the latitude of Doha (25.33°N). Over
90 inverters of 500 kW were used for generating AC power in this
reference scenario.
3.3. Energy production
Meteorological input files in TMY3 format were generated from the
1236
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 73 (2017) 1231–1246
site-adapted hourly satellite-derived data for the period 2003–2013
relative to the area corresponding to the QEERI ground radiometric
station. Hourly values of the energy output of each reference plant were
then calculated using the System Advisor Model (SAM 2015.6.30,
https://sam.nrel.gov/).
Fig. 7 shows the long-term average monthly energy output for each
CSP and PV reference plant for simulations relative to the period
2000–2013. The energy produced from CSP plants with thermal
storage presents lower intra-annual variability. The PV plant too has
low interannual variability because of the tilting effect which compen-
sates seasonal changes in GHI. The solar power plant with higher
variability is the tower plant with the highest electricity production in
the month of November when aerosols load is lower.
Fig. 8 shows the annual energy output for each CSP and PV
scenarios, together with the annual DNI. The energy produced by all
plants remains quite stable through the eleven years of simulation. To
estimate the uncertainty of the energy outputs, the year 2013 was also
modelled with SAM using as a meteorological input the ground solar
radiation components measured in the QEERI station. Table 6 presents
the annual simulation values for each reference solar plant located in
the QEERI station calculated with the satellite-derived data and with
the measured irradiances as input, together with their associated
uncertainties. The largest uncertainty regarding annual energy was
L. Martín-Pomares et al. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 73 (2017) 1231–1246

Fig. 5. GHI monthly means in Qatar (kWh m−2 year−1).

found in the case of Ivanpah 1 (the direct steam tower plant) with 4. Long-term analysis
around 5%, and the lowest one corresponds to the parabolic trough
without thermal storage, with an uncertainty below 1%. Table 7 shows the mean and standard deviation values of the

1237
L. Martín-Pomares et al. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 73 (2017) 1231–1246

Fig. 5. (continued)

annual energy output of each plant obtained from the SAM simulation percentiles were calculated from the annual energy relative to the
results for the period 2003–2013, for the location of the QEERI solar period 2003–2013, assuming a normal distribution of the annual
ground station. Exceedance probabilities for the yearly P90 and P95 electricity production and including uncertainties associated with the

1238
L. Martín-Pomares et al. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 73 (2017) 1231–1246

Fig. 5. (continued)

solar radiation input to the SAM model [64]. P90 and P95 exceedance solar energy power plant systems. The P90 and P95 were calculated as
probabilities are appropriate choices to characterize the worst situation shown in (3), where µ is the mean value, and U is the combined
that can be expected in the long-term for electricity production from uncertainty which results from (4), where in turn Uinput is the annual

1239
L. Martín-Pomares et al. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 73 (2017) 1231–1246

Fig. 6. DNI monthly means in Qatar (kWh m−2 year−1).

uncertainty of satellite-derived DNI (3.3% based on the comparison of annual variability, which is the standard deviation of the 11 years of
DNI estimated in 2013 with ground measurements), USAM is the annual plant production from the simulation.
uncertainty of the SAM model listed in Table 6, and σint is the inter-

1240
L. Martín-Pomares et al. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 73 (2017) 1231–1246

Fig. 6. (continued)

P 90 = μ−1. 282 U 2
U = Uinput 2
+ USAM 2
+ σint (4)
P 95 = μ−1. 645 U (3)
Table 8 shows the estimated values of the probabilities of excee-

1241
L. Martín-Pomares et al. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 73 (2017) 1231–1246

Fig. 6. (continued)

dance. Comparing the annual percentile P90 with the mean, it can be the case of both parabolic trough and molten salts tower plants, 37%
observed that the worst years (statistically represented by P90) result for large direct steam solar tower, 53% for Fresnel technology and 32%
in a reduction of the expected long-term production of around 33% in for flat-PV. The higher stability shown by flat-PV is a direct conse-

1242
L. Martín-Pomares et al. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 73 (2017) 1231–1246

Table 5 Table 6
Main characteristics of reference solar power plants. Energy estimates for 2013 and uncertainty.

Parameter Parabolic Direct steam Molten salt Linear Plant Satellite input Measured input Uncertainty (%)
trough tower tower Fresnel (GWh) (GWh)

Power (MWe) 50 126 19.9 30 Parabolic trough 174 180 3.3

HTF Therminol Water/ 60% NaNO3, Water/ Parabolic trough no 131 132 0.7
VP1 Steam 40% KNO3 Steam TS
Total reflective ≈500.000 ≈800.000 ≈305.000 ≈300.000 Molten salt tower 123 127 3.1
area (m2) Direct steam tower 230 242 4.9
Thermal storage 7.5 0 15 0 Linear Fresnel 62 65 4.6
capacity Flat PV grid- 89 93 3.3
(hours) connected

Fig. 7. Average monthly energy output for each scenario estimated with SAM using hourly satellite-derived solar radiation and meteorological data in TMY3 format.

Fig. 8. Annual energy output for each scenario estimated with SAM using hourly satellite-derived solar radiation and meteorological data in TMY3 format.

1243
L. Martín-Pomares et al. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 73 (2017) 1231–1246

Table 7 nearly doubled. Still, electricity prices in Qatar are considerably lower
Mean and standard deviation of annual energy. than most countries worldwide, such as the US where the average
residential electricity tariff is about $0.13/kWh (https://www.eia.gov/
Plant Mean (GWh) Standard Deviation (GWh)
electricity/monthly) vs. $0.036/kWh for Qatar (http://www.km.com.
Parabolic trough 171.27 7.07 qa/customerservice/pages/tariff.aspx). These incentives make it harder
Parabolic trough no TS 133.09 3.75 for utility-scale solar energy to be financially competitive, especially at
Molten salt tower 120.82 3.40
the residential level where PV systems tend to be twice as costly as
Direct steam tower 227.27 11.70
Linear Fresnel 62.45 2.16 utility-scale PV applications [69].
Flat PV grid-connected 94.23 2.37
6. Conclusions

Table 8
P90 and P95 exceedance probabilities for electricity production from simulated solar
power plants.
Plant P90 (GWe) P95 (GWe)
Parabolic trough 114 97
Parabolic trough no TS 98 88
Molten salt tower 81 70
Direct steam tower 142 118
Linear Fresnel 39 33
Flat PV grid-connected 63 54
quence of the higher stability of global solar irradiation, which is the
solar radiation component being converted into power energy by this
type of technology. On the other hand, concentrating solar technologies
that rely on the incident beam component are sensitive to the
variability of DNI. However, the parabolic trough cases showed also
relative good performance compared to the Tower and Fresnel systems.
5. Solar energy in Qatar: challenges and opportunities
Qatar's plan to generate 2% of its electricity from solar power by
2020 and 20% by 2030 [65] could yield natural gas savings of 0.24
Mtoe (millions of tonnes of oil equivalent) in 2020 and 2.13 Mtoe by
2030 [66]. These natural gas savings could be repurposed for addi-
tional natural gas trade to increase the country's revenues or left
untapped to extend the lifetime of the country's natural gas reserves. In
terms of environmental benefits, natural gas savings would reduce CO2
emissions in Qatar by 0.51 million tonne (Mt) by 2020 and 4.5 Mt by
2030 [66]. If the additional exported gas were to replace coal, diesel
fuel, heating oil, or gasoline, this fuel switching would provide
additional reductions in CO2 emissions in the importing countries [66].
Plans are already in motion to develop a 200 MW solar plant in the
west side of the country, which is expected to be operative in 2020. The
carbon-neutral program associated with the 2022 FIFA World Cup in
Qatar offers additional opportunities for solar energy applications,
although now that the event has been scheduled for the month of
December, cooling, which is the main source of electricity consump-
tion, will no longer be an issue. There are no immediate plans for other
sources of renewable energy such as wind.
Overall, Qatar is well poised for a strong rate of PV adoption in the
next two decades. However, there are still significant limitations due to
the lack of incentives and regulations, which are needed to promote PV
adoption, particularly at the domestic level. For example, tax credits to
incentivize PV adoption cannot be used in Qatar due to the absence of
income tax. Also, there are no plans to introduce measures such as net
metering and the feed-in tariff, which have significantly benefitted the
adoption of utility-scale and residential renewable energy in many
countries worldwide. Finally, electricity is highly subsidized for ex-
patriates and businesses, and free for private citizens in Qatar.
According to the IEA, electricity subsidies in Qatar averaged $2.1 bn
in the period 2012-14 [67,68], and natural gas subsidies, which partly
supports electricity costs since electricity is almost entirely produced
from gas in Qatar, has also been strongly subsidized ($1.56 bn Avg. for
the period 2012-14). Since September 2015, the electricity tariff has
This work presents an analysis and estimations of both the long-
term solar resource and the expected electric energy production for
several specific scenarios in Qatar. Satellite-derived data for 2003–
2013 were generated, characterized and improved to deliver annual
and monthly maps of solar resource components. The ground mea-
surements of GHI, DNI and DHI available in Doha were used to
improve the satellite-derived data. The resulting datasets helped
simulate energy production and determine the uncertainty of the solar
energy potential modelled with the SAM tool.
Satellite-derived data were site-adapted with the help of ground
radiometric measurements resulting in hourly datasets with around
12% of RMSD for GHI and 30% of RMSD for DNI. According to these
results, solar resources in Qatar are abundant and stable across the
country.
The long-term GHI and DNI maps developed show that the south of
the country presents the higher potential for CSP and most of Qatar is
suitable for PV deployment.
Long-term simulations of the energy produced by several selected
solar technologies covering both CSP and PV were also computed with
SAM. The uncertainty in the annual energy simulated by SAM was
around 3% for parabolic trough, molten salt solar tower and PV
scenarios, and it was about 5% for the direct steam solar tower and
Fresnel plants. Finally, the P90 and P95 exceedance probabilities
estimated for each scenario show that the most reliable energy
production is observed in the parabolic trough, large thermal storage
tower plant (molten salt tower plant) and photovoltaic scenarios.
Acknowledgements
The authors express their gratitude to the dedicated personnel who
maintain QEERI radiometric station and QMD meteorological stations.
The maps were kindly generated by Dr Yasir E. Mohieldeen whose
collaboration is highly appreciated. The authors also wish to acknowl-
edge the Solar Heating and Cooling program (SHC) within the
International Energy Agency (IEA) and in particular, all the experts
who participate in the IEA Task 46 (Solar Resource Assessment and
Forecasting). The development of this work was partly motivated by
participation in Task 46 Expert Meetings.
References
[1] Nematollahi O, Hoghooghi H, Rasti M, Sedaghat A. Energy demands and renewable
energy resources in the Middle East. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2016;54:1172–81.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2015.10.058.
[2] Munawwar S, Ghedira H. A review of renewable energy and solar industry growth
in the GCC region. Energy Procedia 2014;57:3191–202. http://dx.doi.org/
10.1016/j.egypro.2015.06.069.
[3] Charabi Y, Gastli A. GIS assessment of large CSP plant in Duqum, Oman. Renew
Sustain Energy Rev 2010;14:835–41. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/
j.rser.2009.08.019.
[4] Zell E, Gasim S, Wilcox S, Katamoura S, Stoffel T, Shibli H, et al. Assessment of
solar radiation resources in Saudi Arabia. Sol Energy 2015;119:422–38. http://
dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.solener.2015.06.031.
[5] Mokri A, Aal Ali M, Emziane M. Solar energy in the United Arab Emirates: a review.
Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2013;28:340–75. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/
j.rser.2013.07.038.
[6] Liqreina A, Qoaider L Dry cooling of concentrating solar power (CSP) plants, an
economic competitive option for the desert regions of the MENA region. Sol Energy
n.d.;103:417–24.

1244
L. Martín-Pomares et al.
[7] King DL, Gonzalez S, Galbraith GM, Boyson WE. Performance model for grid-
connected photovoltaic inverters, SAND2007-5036. Contract 2007;38:655–60.
[8] Sanfilippo A, Martin-Pomares L, Mohandes N, Perez-Astudillo D, Bachour D. An
adaptive multi-modeling approach to solar nowcasting. Sol Energy
2016;125:77–85. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.solener.2015.11.041.
[9] Antonanzas-Torres F, Sanz-Garcia A, Martínez-de-Pisón FJ, Antonanzas J,
Perpiñán-Lamigueiro O, Polo J. Towards downscaling of aerosol gridded dataset for
improving solar resource assessment, an application to Spain. Renew Energy
2014;71:534–44. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2014.06.010.
[10] Griffiths S, Mills R. Potential of rooftop solar photovoltaics in the energy system
evolution of the United Arab Emirates. Energy Strateg Rev 2016;9:1–7. http://
dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.esr.2015.11.001.
[11] Gherboudj I, Ghedira H. Assessment of solar energy potential over the United Arab
Emirates using remote sensing and weather forecast data. Renew Sustain Energy
Rev 2016;55:1210–24. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2015.03.099.
[12] Palenzuela P, Alarcón-Padilla DC, Zaragoza G, Blanco J. Comparison between CSP
+MED and CSP+RO in Mediterranean Area and MENA Region: Techno-economic
Analysis. Energy Procedia 2015;69:1938–47. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.egy-
pro.2015.03.192.
[13] Gastli A, Charabi Y, Zekri S. GIS-based assessment of combined CSP electric power
and seawater desalination plant for Duqum—Oman. Renew Sustain Energy Rev
2010;14:821–7. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2009.08.020.
[14] Trieb F, Müller-Steinhagen H. Concentrating solar power for seawater desalination
in the Middle East and North Africa. Desalination 2008;220:165–83. http://
dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.2007.01.030.
[15] Despotovic M, Nedic V, Despotovic D, Cvetanovic S. Evaluation of empirical models
for predicting monthly mean horizontal diffuse solar radiation. Renew Sustain
Energy Rev 2016;56:246–60. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2015.11.058.
[16] Bakirci K. Models of solar radiation with hours of bright sunshine: a review. Renew
Sustain Energy Rev 2009;13:2580–8.
[17] Mohanty S, Patra PK, Sahoo SS. Prediction and application of solar radiation with
soft computing over traditional and conventional approach – A comprehensive
review. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2016;56:778–96. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/
j.rser.2015.11.078.
[18] Sharifi SS, Rezaverdinejad V, Nourani V. Estimation of daily global solar radiation
using wavelet regression, ANN, GEP and empirical models: a comparative study of
selected temperature-based approaches. J Atmos Sol-Terr Phys 2016;149:131–45.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jastp.2016.10.008.
[19] Yadav AK, Chandel SS. Solar radiation prediction using Artificial Neural Network
techniques: a review. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2014;33:772–81. http://
dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2013.08.055.
[20] Sengupta M, Habte A, Kurtz S, Dobos A, Wilbert S, Lorenz E, et al. Best Practices
Handbook For The Collection And Use Of Solar Resource Data For Solar Energy
Applications. NREL 2015.
[21] Davy RJ, Huang JR, Troccoli A. Improving the accuracy of hourly satellite-derived
solar irradiance by combining with dynamically downscaled estimates using
generalised additive models. Sol Energy 2016;135:854–63. http://dx.doi.org/
10.1016/j.solener.2016.06.052.
[22] Bojanowski JS, Vrieling A, Skidmore AK. A comparison of data sources for creating
a long-term time series of daily gridded solar radiation for Europe. Sol Energy
2014;99:152–71. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.solener.2013.11.007.
[23] Kanters J, Wall M, Kjellsson E. The solar Map as a knowledge base for solar energy
use. Energy Procedia 2014;48:1597–606. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.egy-
pro.2014.02.180.
[24] Polo J, Wilbert S, J.A.Ruiz-Arias, Meyer R, Gueymard C, Šúri M, et al. Integration
of ground measurements to model derived data. Report Task 46 IEA-SHC;2015.
〈www.task46.iea-Shc.org〉.
[25] Ramachandra TV, Shruthi BV Spatial mapping of renewable energy potential.
Renew Sustain Energy Rev n.d.;11:1460–80.
[26] Rumbayan M, Abudureyimu A, Nagasaka K Mapping of solar energy potential in
Indonesia using artificial neural network and geographical information system.
Renew Sustain Energy Rev n.d.;16:1437–49.
[27] Gastli A, Charabi Y. Solar electricity prospects in Oman using GIS-based solar
radiation maps. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2010;14:790–7.
[28] Haider, R. M SA, AHK, S. Solar energy potential in Pakistan. J Renew Sustain
Energy 2012:4.
[29] El Ouderni AR, Maatallah T, El Alimi S, Ben Nassrallah S Experimental assessment
of the solar energy potential in the gulf of Tunis, Tunisia. Renew Sustain Energy
Rev n.d.;20:155–68.
[30] Polo J, Bernardos A, Navarro AA, Fernandez-Peruchena CM, Ramírez L, Guisado
MV, et al. Solar resources and power potential mapping in Vietnam using satellite-
derived and GIS-based information. Energy Convers Manag 2015;98:348–58.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2015.04.016.
[31] Kristin Seyboth, Sverrisson F, Appavou F, Brown A, Epp B, Leidreiter A, et al.
Renewables 2016 Global Status Report. 2016.
[32] Kottek M, Grieser J, Beck C, Rudolf B, Rubel F. World map of the Köppen-Geiger
climate classification updated. Meteor Z 2006;15:259–63. http://dx.doi.org/
10.1127/0941-2948/2006/0130.
[33] Koppen W. Klassifikation der klimate nachTemperatur, Niederschlag and
Jahreslauf. Petermanns Geogr Mitt 1918;64:193–NaN.
[34] Alamdari P, Nematollahi O, Alemrajabi AA. Solar energy potentials in Iran: a
review. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2013;21:778–88. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/
j.rser.2012.12.052.
[35] Stökler S, Schillings C, Kraas B. Solar resource assessment study for Pakistan.
Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2016;58:1184–8. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/
j.rser.2015.12.298.
1245
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 73 (2017) 1231–1246
[36] Najafi G, Ghobadian B, Mamat R, Yusaf T, Azmi WH. Solar energy in Iran: current
state and outlook. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2015;49:931–42. http://dx.doi.org/
10.1016/j.rser.2015.04.056.
[37] Abdalla YAG, Baghdady MK. Global and diffuse solar radiation in Doha (Qatar). Sol
Wind Technol 1985;2:209–12. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0741-983X(85)90018-
9.
[38] Alnaser WE, Almohanadi AH. Wind and solar energy in Qatar, 15. Pergamon;
1990. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0360-5442(90)90075-D.
[39] Bachour D, Perez-Astudillo D. Ground measurements of Global Horizontal
Irradiation in Doha. Qatar Renew Energy 2014;71:32–6. http://dx.doi.org/
10.1016/j.renene.2014.05.005.
[40] Bachour D, Perez-Astudillo D. Ground-measurement GHI Map for Qatar. Energy
Procedia 2014;49:2297–302. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.egypro.2014.03.243.
[41] Jahangiri M, Ghaderi R, Haghani A, Nematollahi O. Finding the best locations for
establishment of solar-wind power stations in Middle-East using GIS: a review.
Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2016;66:38–52. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/
j.rser.2016.07.069.
[42] Perez-Astudillo D, Bachour D. Variability of measured Global Horizontal
Irradiation throughout Qatar. Sol Energy 2015;119:169–78. http://dx.doi.org/
10.1016/j.solener.2015.06.045.
[43] Perez-Astudillo D, Bachour D. DNI, GHI and DHI ground measurements in Doha.
Qatar Energy Procedia 2014;49:2398–404. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.egy-
pro.2014.03.254.
[44] Long CN, Dutton EG. BSRN global network recommended QC tests, V20.0. BSRN
Tech Rep 2002.
[45] Polo J. Solar global horizontal and direct normal irradiation maps in Spain derived
from geostationary satellites. J Atmos Sol-Terr Phys 2015;130–131:81–8. http://
dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jastp.2015.05.015.
[46] Polo J, Antonanzas-Torres F, Vindel JM, Ramirez L. Sensitivity of satellite-based
methods for deriving solar radiation to different choice of aerosol input and models.
Renew Energy 2014;68:785–92. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2014.03.022.
[47] Polo J, Estalayo G. Impact of atmospheric aerosol loads on Concentrating Solar
Power production in arid-desert sites. Sol Energy 2015;115:621–31. http://
dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.solener.2015.03.031.
[48] Gueymard CA. REST2: high-performance solar radiation model for cloudless-sky
irradiance, illuminance, and photosynthetically active radiation GÇô validation
with a benchmark dataset. Sol Energy 2008;82:272–85.
[49] Espinar B, Ramírez L, Drews A, Beyer HG, Zarzalejo LF, Polo J, et al. Analysis of
different comparison parameters applied to solar radiation data from satellite and
German radiometric stations. Sol Energy 2009;83:118–25. http://dx.doi.org/
10.1016/j.solener.2008.07.009.
[50] M FJJr. TheKolmogorov-Smirnov test for goodness of fit. J Am Stat Assoc
1951;56:68–78.
[51] Gueymard C a. A review of validation methodologies and statistical performance
indicators for modeled solar radiation data: towards a better bankability of solar
projects. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2014;39:1024–34. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/
j.rser.2014.07.117.
[52] Carow J. Anpassung Langjähriger Satelliten-Strahlungszeitreihen an
Bodenmesswerte Eines Jahres [THES. Diploma thesis]. University of Applied
Science Nordhausen; 2008.
[53] Cebecauer T, Suri M. Accuracy improvements of satellite-derived solar resource
based on GEMS re-annalysis aerosols. SolarPACES 2010 Conference; 2010.
[54] Harmsen EW, Cruz PT, Mecikalski JR. Calibration of selected pyranometers and
satellite derived solar radiation in Puerto Rico. Int J Renew Energy Technol
2014;5:43–54. http://dx.doi.org/10.1504/IJRET.2014.059660.
[55] Vindel JM, Polo J, Antonanzas-Torres F. Improving daily output of global to direct
solar irradiance models with ground measurements. J Renew Sustain Energy
2013;5:63123. http://dx.doi.org/10.1063/1.4850515.
[56] Polo J, Wilbert S, Ruiz-Arias JA, Meyer R, Gueymard C, S??ri M , et al. Preliminary
survey on site-adaptation techniques for satellite-derived and reanalysis solar
radiation datasets. Sol Energy 2016;132:25–37. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.sol-
ener.2016.03.001.
[57] Perez-Astudillo D, Bachour D, Martín-Pomares L, Polo J. Future trends in Global
and Direct solar irradiations due to Increased aerosol loads in Qatar. Sol World
Congr 2015:2015.
[58] Abdallah, Martinez F. PV Performance and Reliability in Qatar. PVTC 2016,
Marseille (France);2016.
[59] Montoya FG, Aguilera MJ, Manzano-Agugliaro F. Renewable energy production in
Spain: a review. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2014;33:509–31. http://dx.doi.org/
10.1016/j.rser.2014.01.091.
[60] Martín H, de la Hoz J, Velasco G, Castilla M, García de Vicuña JL. Promotion of
concentrating solar thermal power (CSP) in Spain: performance analysis of the
period 1998–2013. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2015;50:1052–68. http://
dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2015.05.062.
[61] Dinter F, Gonzalez DM. Operability, reliability and economic benefits of CSP with
thermal energy storage: first year of operation of ANDASOL 3. Energy Procedia
2014;49:2472–81.
[62] Relloso S, García E. Tower technology cost reduction approach after gemasolar
experience. Energy Procedia 2015;69:1660–6. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.egy-
pro.2015.03.125.
[63] Abbas R, Martínez-Val JM. Analytic optical design of linear Fresnel collectors with
variable widths and shifts of mirrors. Renew Energy 2015;75:81–92. http://
dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2014.09.029.
[64] Polo J, Téllez FM, Tapia C. Comparative analysis of long-term solar resource and
CSP production for bankability. Renew Energy 2016;90:38–45. http://dx.doi.org/
10.1016/j.renene.2015.12.057.
L. Martín-Pomares et al.
[65] REN21. Renewables 2015-Global Status Report. vol. 4. 2015. doi:10.1016/0267-
3649(88)90030-1.
[66] Sanfilippo, A, Pederson, L. Impacts of PV adoption in Qatar on natural gas exports
to the far east. In Macmillan P, editor. Lester, L, Efird, B; 2016.
[67] International Energy Agency. World Energy Outlook 2015 Factsheet. Glob Energy
Trends to 2040The Energy Sect Clim Chang Run-up to COP21; 2015:1–4.
doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/20725302.
1246
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 73 (2017) 1231–1246
[68] International Energy Agency. World Energy Outlook 2015. Executive Summary.
International Energy Agency Books Online; 2015:1–9. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.
1787/weo-2005-en.
[69] Tsuchida B, Sergici S, Mudge B, Gorman W, Fox-Penner P, Schoene J, et al.
Comparative Generation Costs of Utility-Scale and Residential-Scale PV in Xcel
Energy Colorado’s Service Area; 2015.